Yeah, that it is.
First Contact Vs. Star Trek XI
- Thread starter Falcor5
- Start date
As something of a TOS purist (though I am a bit of a NIner fellow traveler), allow me to say: welcome to my world. 
This, pretty much. I was white hot livid with rage when I saw the first trailer to the movie, to the point I couldn't speak for a whole minute (which in retrospect I'll admit is completely nerdy and hilarious of me in a pathetic sort of way).
But I honestly loved and enjoyed the movie from beginning to end. Part of it just came from an opportunity to geek out ('they finally said Nyota!') but it's also just a really fun movie. It's not a smart movie, it's about as deep as a training pool, but it's a fun movie. Damn it there isn't a single thing with the Star Trek label on it released this decade that was as fun as this movie. I'll go further: It's the only really fun space opera movie released this decade. Maybe it's just me, but I've always preferred galactic adventure to men in tights and I'd like to see more summer blockbusters take place in the stars provided only that they don't suck.
As for the writing, the film is well paced and has a pretty solid handle on all of the characters - though I would have liked to see a little more growth on Kirk's part. The actual plot has some problems, the villain is, well, not at all good, but in its pacing it's honestly quite well put together.
Somehow, they managed to give Star Trek a little rock'n'roll, as they put it, and I actually welcomed this rather than acted stiffly indignant. ('Live long and prosper' used as an insult - nice touch. Really.) So in my estimation they did something right.
Even the reboot with a female Kirk and a blue-skinned, three-eyed Spock that we will get in 10 years?
I think the only movies I'd place Trek 09 over would be...er, only MOVIE... would be Nemesis.
Nemesis was just plain brutal.
Trek 09 just failed.
The difference being that with fifteen years of background with actors who'd played the same characters for fifteen years you'd expect some mild level of competence. There was none.
Trek 09 is just as dismal a failure but at least it had the grace of being almost entirely brand new.
Nemesis was just plain brutal.
Trek 09 just failed.
The difference being that with fifteen years of background with actors who'd played the same characters for fifteen years you'd expect some mild level of competence. There was none.
Trek 09 is just as dismal a failure but at least it had the grace of being almost entirely brand new.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Got SERENITY?
You heard me.
But then, I'm not Joss Whedon's biggest fan at the best of times, so this statement can be taken with as many pounds of salt as you like.
Even still, I'll concede I rather liked Serenity, and upon closer re-examination, Firefly. Also, Serenity has a much, much better villain.
Firefly was fun, but Serenity took all the fun from the series and beat it down into a film that wasn't anywhere near as light as the series. Part of this, yes, is due to the story it Whedon chose to tell with the film. But he chose that story, and the film's tone, far bleaker than the series ever was, is the result.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS is a fun movie, but probably has as much down and death aspect aspects as SERENITY. Just because you can get moved by something doesn't make it less fun (otherwise folks wouldn't rewatch TWOK.)
Well, we are discussing this in light of Trek XI, which has a body count that is greater than BBtS, Serenity and TWOK combined. Hell, with two planets destroyed, it may have body count greater than the original Star Wars trilogy.
If you can find the bodies.
If you can find the bodies.
I'm not talking about being moved. I'm talking about all of the characters being dour versions of the people they had been on the television series. I'm talking about the ensemble being reduced to background duty except for Mal, Simon, and River. Even the score lacks the spark of the series. The tone never realizes how fun the series could be, even in its darkest moments.
^^^I'd have to agree.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
I'd agree too ... for the first viewing.
Within two days, I had reversed that view and never looked back, loving it for what it is and not for what I expected it to be.
And less prefunctory. Serenity's body count consists of 'we no longer need this character so let's kill him now.' The film's attempts to milk these for drama are far, far less than half-hearted, they're basically not there at all.
All you need Ron Glass for is advice. So he shows up, says some advice, and then dies. You just need Alan Tudyk to pilot, so guess what? When they land, he dies. It's not drama, and doesn't even try to disguise itself as such.
On the other hand,
Blowing up Vulcan and KILLING SPOCK'S MOTHER exists as a pure visceral punch to the gut. And Trek XI knows that but doesn't overplay it, which I found fairly wise.
I'd also pretty much agree with what Harvey said (I must ask: formerly Hirogen Alpha, right?), but even still, the movie is okay and the villain is a nice concept. Part Gene Roddenberry, part Gestapo, all comic book supervillainy but at least an interesting idea. But if Serenity was the best space opera movie of the decade, we'd have been screwed, pretty much.
So hurrah for Star Trek!
Last edited:
Don't get me wrong, I'm fond of it too--but it's a darker film than I'd expect, given the tone of the series. And it's criminal how little screen time Ron Glass has.
